It says it will be considered a forfeit in the conference standings only so it sounds like a w for FU and an L for Citadel. If not why even mention it?
Flagman liked this
Spring Football Schedule
I wonder if Citadel is wishing they hadn't played EKU?
How would it be fair to the other teams for Furman to have an free win and start out with advantage for the league championship? We wouldn’t like it if Wofford “won” the coin toss and finished a game ahead of us, giving them the league crown and the auto bid. No thanks, I want to win the bid on the field.
I think I’d just argue that in the current circumstances the 11 game limit is completely arbitrary. It says that you can’t play more than 11 in a school year but playing 22 in a calendar year is fine. That’s pretty arbitrary. And it’s not like they knew there would be a Spring season. If the “experts” are right, there probably won’t be. So how can you blame them for playing? I hope they can play. Hoping you can duck your rival because of some jive technicality is weak. I don’t think a trip to Charleston in the Winter would suck at all (although it is dangerous after dark now).The Jackal wrote: ↑Wed Oct 21, 2020 3:26 pmRoundball wrote: ↑Wed Oct 21, 2020 3:08 pmThe Bulldogs have applied for a waiver that will allow an eighth game. I wonder if that means there is still a chance of a game against The Citadel?
“Citadel football not eligible for SoCon title in the spring, won’t play rival Furman.” https://www.postandcourier.com/sports/c ... a95c4.html
My question remains the same - why would they get a waiver?
It's not like there was injustice worked against them or something flukey happened. They opted to schedule 4 games in the fall when no other SoCon team did.
I understand why they may want a waiver. I just can't figure out what their argument would be for one.
FUpaladin08 liked this
We BETTER be 1-0.. . because it really wouldn't be fair to lose the auto-bid at 6-1 (FU) vs some other team (7-1) because of something Citadel did. FUBeAR mentioned "win percent" within conference and that is a real possibility if they don't grant us a W. So I think they have to give us a W.
Hopefully someone can confirm we get a W for the Citadel game.
Last edited by gofurman on Wed Oct 21, 2020 4:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I do like that we get an off week prior to Wofford while they are playing (April 10) - I like OOC but I kind of hope we keep that week off and if we add a game we do it in week 2
That is not my read of it.
According to the release: "The no-contest is a game not played and will be considered a forfeit in the conference standings only, per NCAA policies."
"Forfeit" has a definition under the NCAA rules. I believe the "winning" team will get booked a 1-0 win. It will apply only to conference standings and may end up as an asterisk in the record books going forward.
If the SoCon wanted to say that the game is not played or does not apply to the standings, they would have said that. That's not what it says. It says the game is counted as a forfeit, which has a definition.
Remember too, this would be something that the league presidents agreed upon (or at least had a majority of support for). So, the arrangement is effectively the result of a democratic process.
Theoretically, they could have worked out a different arrangement - gone by winning percentage or something and create a whole new series of tie breakers. That's not what they did.
Again, the Citadel opted to play 4 games this fall. No one twisted their arm to do that. If they don't like the result, they should have made different choices.
gofurman wrote: ↑Wed Oct 21, 2020 4:07 pmWe BETTER be 1-0.. . because it really wouldn't be fair to lose the auto-bid at 6-1 (FU) vs some other team (7-1) because of something Citadel did. FUBeAR mentioned "win percent" within conference and that is a real possibility if they don't grant us a W. So I think they have to give us a W.
Hopefully someone can confirm we get a W for the Citadel game.
To go with a "winning percentage" arrangement, I think that would have to be voted on and approved by the league presidents, which does not appear to be the case. The conference tie breakers have long been tied to head-to-head matchups.
Just as example, say Furman went 6-1 and beat Wofford. Wofford went 7-1, lost to Furman, and beat whomever Furman lost to. Wofford would have a better winning percentage (by tenths), would win the autobid with the same number of losses against a team that beat them head to head.
That's significantly less fair, in my opinion.
Here, majority rules. Everyone had the same odds of pulling their name from a hat. Furman is the beneficiary.
From someone OUTSIDE of the Furman Football Program, but VERY well informed...when asked if we start the season 1-0...
“When a team demonstrates selfish behavior that leads to the deletion of a sanctioned conference game from their schedule and every other conference member's too, just to play(and lose) 4 exhibition games then they deserve what they get....a lifetime of Bellhoppery. We only count sanctioned games played on the field of battle. So no we are 0-0.”
“When a team demonstrates selfish behavior that leads to the deletion of a sanctioned conference game from their schedule and every other conference member's too, just to play(and lose) 4 exhibition games then they deserve what they get....a lifetime of Bellhoppery. We only count sanctioned games played on the field of battle. So no we are 0-0.”
NCAA MANUAL
20.10.1 ...intercollegiate athletics...competition in amateur athletics…
20.10.1.2 …maintaining a line of demarcation between student-athletes who participate in the Collegiate Model and athletes competing in the professional model
20.10.1 ...intercollegiate athletics...competition in amateur athletics…
20.10.1.2 …maintaining a line of demarcation between student-athletes who participate in the Collegiate Model and athletes competing in the professional model
FUBeAR wrote: ↑Wed Oct 21, 2020 4:22 pmFrom someone OUTSIDE of the Furman Football Program, but VERY well informed...when asked if we start the season 1-0...
“When a team demonstrates selfish behavior that leads to the deletion of a sanctioned conference game from their schedule and every other conference member's too, just to play(and lose) 4 exhibition games then they deserve what they get....a lifetime of Bellhoppery. We only count sanctioned games played on the field of battle. So no we are 0-0.”
However it works out, we can resolve this by just beating everyone.
I think the issue would be what happens if both Furman and the Citadel go 7-0 (which is possible, because they don't play). Furman would have to get the tie breaker.
I agree on the Citadel though. Their decision to play as much football this fall and then do so again in the spring is just ridiculous. Either play 4+ games this fall and sit out the spring (as several teams are doing), or 3 or fewer and play in the spring.
I said this a few weeks ago, but if I were a Citadel fan or booster I would be pissed. They acted outside the best interest of the conference, lost to everyone they played, were embarrassed in their only home game, forfeit a game against their biggest rival (a home game), and hurt their chances to play for a conference or national title.
Funny how so many on this message board that criticized us for not playing fall football are the same ones criticizing The Citadel for doing just that. Is everyone now happy that we didn’t play?
Nope - playing Fall ball is/was fine.
Playing 4 games (vs. 1-3) & paying another FCS School to come to your house and whip your a$$ was pure bellhoppishness!
...and that said FUBeAR (pretty sure) never criticized FU for not playing. ALL things considered, it was probably for the best for Furman to not play this Fall.
NCAA MANUAL
20.10.1 ...intercollegiate athletics...competition in amateur athletics…
20.10.1.2 …maintaining a line of demarcation between student-athletes who participate in the Collegiate Model and athletes competing in the professional model
20.10.1 ...intercollegiate athletics...competition in amateur athletics…
20.10.1.2 …maintaining a line of demarcation between student-athletes who participate in the Collegiate Model and athletes competing in the professional model
I would never criticize them for playing. They played, and we are just hoping we will. Some “experts” are now saying the winter will be far worse than anything we’ve seen. If the presidents “listen to the experts” they will likely cancel again in a few weeks. So I think playing was the smart choice. Playing 4 was an interesting choice, but it doesn’t knock them out of contention for SoCon or national championships because they were never in contention in the first place. The only down side is that it screws up the SoCon schedule. We are the losers because if we win the SoCon based on a “win” we drew out of a hat it will be the mother of all asterisks.
It would be great for the football program if we could schedule a home game against one of the top tier FCS teams, like N. Dakota State or James Madison. Pay up to get a game that might be nationally televised. Otherwise, playing weak SoCon teams in the winter is not going to create any excitement.